4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

The evolution of gravel bed channels after dam removal: Case study of the Anaconda and Union City Dam removals

Journal

GEOMORPHOLOGY
Volume 71, Issue 1-2, Pages 245-262

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2004.08.018

Keywords

dam removal; sediment transport; gravel; fluvial morphology; sediment management; streambed dynamics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Anaconda and Union City Dams oil the Naugatuck River in Connecticut were removed in February and October 1999. A detailed Study of the sites prior to removal was undertaken including sediment testing and predictions Of upstream channel formation post-darn removal. The 3.35-m-high timber crib/rock fill spillway of the Anaconda Dam partially breached during a storm prior to the dam's scheduled removal allowing a portion of the impounded sediment to move down through the river system. This event changed the removal plans and the remainder of the spillway was removed under an emergency order in the course of 4 days. The Union City Dam, a 2.44-m-high timber crib/rock fill dam capped with concrete and stone, was removed on schedule. A portion of the impounded sediment was removed by mechanical means during the deconstruction of the structure. The evolution of the two upstream channels post-project provided unique challenges and valuable insights as to what kind of channel transition can be expected in gravel bed river systems after a low head dam has been removed. This paper describes the initial engineering analysis and design, the subsequent removal of the two dams, and compares observations on the transition of the upstream channels following dam removal to the initial engineering predictions and other models. The relatively steep gravel bed channels evolved in a predictable manner, except where anthropogenic barriers (sanitary sewer, rock weir) interrupted. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available